As an Amherst resident, I am deeply concerned about the rhetoric being pushed by my fellow citizens who oppose the Jones Library renovations and support the petition to “pivot away” from the project.

I am inside this library at least once a week and rely on resources offered by the Jones, which is why I am firmly in favor of renovation and expansion over repairs that would only fix minor issues while not ensuring the long-term vitality of our library.

While many are concerned about losing “historic features,” I worry that we are forgetting the library is not a museum or an artifact, but a community space. My priority is a library that serves this community, and expansion of the Jones allows for a stronger and more accessible public space. Last year, Franklin County saw the massive success of the Greenfield Public Library, which was embraced as a “commitment to the next generation.” Amherst’s next generation deserves the same.

The argument that many access the library’s resources from home feels irrelevant to me. As a lower-income community member who spends physical time in the building, I see the value of the space itself for those most vulnerable, who often are able to use the library’s resources only in person.

For parents who rely on free children’s activities, expansion means things as basic as clearer sight lines in the children’s room, more opportunities for youth events, and young adult programming that isn’t fighting for space between the children’s and adult sections.

For community groups, it could mean having more than two rooms available to book diverse events and workshops. For the building itself, it means a library that will still exist in 50 years, not one that will crumble as we argue about not receiving a $2 million preservation grant.

It is obvious to me from the second I walk inside how much it would benefit librarians and patrons alike to have a renovated building, something I would happily put my own taxpayer dollars toward. While compromises have been made due to cost, I support the choices made by the Jones Library Building Committee and can see clearly that they have worked hard in the best interests of those who use the library most.

Although the plans for renovation have needed to change over the years due to cost since the initial vote, I will confidently say that I would still vote today in favor of the current plans.

The navigational work being done by the trustees, building committees, Town Council, and library director in the face of high costs is nothing short of impressive. The concerns regularly raised in the Amherst Indy focus on historic preservation and the fact that this building will be “net-zero ready” instead of fully “net-zero,” yet ignore the clear need for this project to move forward for the longevity and vitality of Jones Library. I would rather have a better library today than wait until it’s potentially unsalvageable by spending another decade arguing over minutiae.

A net-zero ready building will meet efficiency requirements and allow for upgrades to fully net- zero in the future and is a step in the right direction, a reasonable compromise that would not be better solved by scrapping the project in favor of “repurposing” a space that barely has room to repurpose.

I want to preserve my library by making it a better space for those who use it first, not by arguing over historic woodwork. The only way for that to happen is to move forward with the Jones Library Project as it currently stands.

Roman Handlen lives in Amherst.